Kline

Kline v. Superior Court

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 108·227 Cal. App. 3d 512·277 Cal. Rptr. 851·91 Daily Journal DAR 1578·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1001
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 1991No. B055511California1,424 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*514 Opinion

Lester Kline, the 74-year old plaintiff in a personal injury action against real parties in interests seeks a writ of mandate to prevent the trial court from denying him a preferential trial date (Code Civ. Proc., § 36, subd. (a)) 1 and ordering the action submitted to compulsory arbitration. (§ 1141.11.) We have notified the parties a peremptory writ may issue in the first instance (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171 [ 203 Cal.Rptr. 626 , 681 P.2d 893 ]), and have read and considered the opposition to the petition filed by the respondent. As will appear, we conclude petitioner is entitled to relief, and this is a proper case for the issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance. (§ 1088.)

Facts

The material facts are not in dispute. In October 1990 petitioner filed a motion for preference pursuant to subdivision (a) of section 36, which then provided, “A civil case shall be entitled to preference upon the motion of any party to the action who has reached the age of 70 years unless the court finds that the party does not have a substantial interest in the case as a whole.” On October 12, 1990, the trial court granted petitioner’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.